Bryan G.· Norton, “Environmental Ethics and Weak. Anth ropocentrism,” Environmental Ethics,. Vol. 6, No.2 (Summer ), pp. Anthropocentrism is. In Bryan G. Norton’s article entitled, “Environmental Ethics and Weak Anthropocentrism,” Norton explains his perspective of how an adequate environmental. A Pragmatic Approach to Environmental Ethics: Norton’s Weak Anthropocentrism. Blog Environmentalists have struggled with a pragmatic.
|Published (Last):||1 September 2014|
|PDF File Size:||8.25 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.21 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: There would be no moral wrong done because the normal Western wrak tions only place intrinsic value in and grant moral considerability to persons, their experiences, and their preferences. This meaning does not equate all value with human needs or interests, but still has humans that are doing the valuing.
Environmentalists have struggled with a pragmatic approach to solving environmental issues. For all the merits of his position, Kant would argue that an ac tion such as the deliberate cruelty to animals was wrong envitonmental because of the pain suffered by the animal per – but because such cruelty harms the humanity in each person including the doer of such noron, a hu manity we have a duty to respect in all mankind.
Email required Address never made public. An environmental ethic based on such an anthropocentric theory of intrinsic value would be what Regan referred to earlier as an ethic “for the use of the environment. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: First, he explains the difference between felt preferences and concerned preferences. Richard Routley[l], for example, has.
Norton’s Weak Anthropocentrism
One ought not to harm other humans unjustifiably 2. These things could be intellectual, aesthetic, moral, spiritual states, or psychological states such as pleasure or hap pine ss. If these internal problems can be overcome, snthropocentrism the position can be made stronger in the ways I mentioned above, then I anthgopocentrism ready to agree that weak an thropocentrism is an adequate ethic of the environment.
Environmental ethics is, however, distinctive vis-a-vis standard British and American ethical systems because, in order to be adequate, it must be nonindividualistic.
Environmental Value and Anthropocentrism. Given the varieties of human states or experiences, it is not surprising to find environmental ethics based on the attribution of intrinsic value to dif ferent states or experiences. Collins – – Science and Engineering Ethics 14 4: But one can harm something only if it is a good in its own right in the sense of being a locus of fundamental value[G]. As noted earlier, Norton has not clearly indicated just what things can, from a weak anthropocentric view, be of intrinsic value, and al though he appears to be in favor of allowing people to attribute intrin sic anthropocentrsim to nonhuman entities, his position still focuses on human val ues that place intrinsic value in human states or expe r ie nce s.
A weak anth ropocentrist may claim that some natural weeak have only instrumental value, some only an ascribed intrinsic value, and some a mixture of both kinds of value. Argument that any environmental ethic must be nonindividualistic. For exam ple, an art object could be judged to have intrinsic value by the va luer. From Environmental to Ecological Ethics: It is compatible with utilitaritian views on which all that matters is the satisfaction of the interests of individual humans.
This position allows for a criticism of various attitudes that deal with the environment.
A Pragmatic Approach to Environmental Ethics: Norton’s Weak Anthropocentrism
In such a theory a work of art itself has an extrinsic, contributory value to an intrinsicly valuable aesthetic experi ence. Bryan Norton has challenged this view and has proposed a modified or “weak” anthropocentrism as an ad equate basis for weqk environmental ethic.
Weak anthropocentrism is environmentsl anthropocentrism, just more environmentally friendly. According to Norton, anthropocentrism is the idea that only humans have intrinsic value, and they are the only organisms at the center of this value.
But this establishes only that theories of the distant future must not be person-regarding. Norton admits that adequacy falls short of correctness or truth.
Norton’s Weak Anthropocentrism | existjg
First he introduces the conversing ideas of anthropocentrism and nonanthropocentrism. The merits of Norton’s position are many, including providing for the criticism of environmentally exploited felt preferences of humans, contraints on human behavior according to ideals such as living in har mony with nature, and, especially, making the important difference be tween felt and considered prefe re nce s.
A weakly anthropocentric value theory, on the other hand, does not focus solely on felt ethicss.
A Typology of Corporate Environmental Policies. A value theory is strongly anthropocentric if all value countenanced by it is explained by reference to satisfac tions of felt preferences of human individuals .